Ive been thinking with the turbo engines that DRS should be replaced with a push to pass system. any further thoughts? The advantage might not be as great but it could remove the 'artificial' feeling a bit.

Nice little description of the difference between KERS and Push to Pass.

That's just the difference in implementation. I'm asking for the actual on-track difference, what would make racing with push to pass different than what we have now?

Indycar use it, and they are rationed a certain amount to be used during the race. A driver could hoard it until the end, or use to to defend, or attack. When or where is up to the driver, not DRS where it's confined to a certain part of the track.

Kers and DRS are taking the skill out of F1. Before we had these we still had overtaking moves and if it was a front runners move on another front runner it was great to see and exciting. Now it is just get close enough and press a button and your past. No skill involved.

Nice little description of the difference between KERS and Push to Pass.

That's just the difference in implementation. I'm asking for the actual on-track difference, what would make racing with push to pass different than what we have now?

Indycar use it, and they are rationed a certain amount to be used during the race. A driver could hoard it until the end, or use to to defend, or attack. When or where is up to the driver, not DRS where it's confined to a certain part of the track.

But KERS isn't limited to where the driver uses it on track and the defending driver could use it to defend...

The only difference between the systems is that push-to-pass is a bolt-on purely to gain extra power and it already has the extra power, whereas KERS has the regenerative energy element in that it gains it's energy from braking.

If F1 wanted to implement a p-t-p system, they could just change how KERS is used throughout a race by changing when and how it could be used.

Indeed, in IndyCar it's 90 seconds over the whole race with maximum 20 seconds per activation.The way I see it, KERS is a way of implementing PTP, so F1 essentially has PTP. The only differences (as far as behaviour is concerned) with IndyCar are the parameters.

So the question, tailored to F1, would be: extend/adapt the KERS parameters in order to make it less artificial?

The only way, I think, DRS could be effectively replaced by KERS is by not allowing KERS to be used for defending. That's what makes DRS so successful: it's reserved for the attacking driver only. And if used that way, it would be just as artificial as DRS is now.

Conclusion: if you really want to make it less artificial, car design should be looked at.

_________________Proud member of the "It's Toro Rosso, not Torro Rosso" action committee.

Push to pass, in my opinion, is better than KERS. They are both similar but push to pass adds an extra layer for strategy. You only have a limited amount so it's up to the driver how and when to use it during the race.

Push to pass, in my opinion, is better than KERS. They are both similar but push to pass adds an extra layer for strategy. You only have a limited amount so it's up to the driver how and when to use it during the race.

Better or not, KERS recycles energy which fits in nicely with the FIA's current strategy of marketing F1 as greener and developing technology for greener road cars. PTP in comparison would look wasteful.

_________________"We can not drive slower, just to make the races more exciting." Alain Prost

Push to pass, in my opinion, is better than KERS. They are both similar but push to pass adds an extra layer for strategy. You only have a limited amount so it's up to the driver how and when to use it during the race.

Your issue isn't with KERS but with the regulations which govern how it's used.

Here's my proposal:

- Double amount allowed on KERS unit- Retain amount allowed gained per lap from recoevery- Allow extra to be carried over from one lap to next if unused

So (I can't remember the figures here so I'm going to use simplified ones) - an example

Current storage on KERS = 100Future maximum on KERS = 200

Driver X ends lap with 30 remaining -> Add 100 allowed gained per lap = 130 available for next lap. If they don't use all of that, what's left gets added to 100 for that lap.

SO, this allows for strategy in that if a driver can end one lap with much more spare than other driver, they have more KERS available to try and overtake. If they use more, they don't.

This would add strategy in that drivers would have to try and force a driver in front to use more KERS one lap to enable increase chance to overtake using extra KERS the following lap.

Defending drivers would have to try and use minimum amount of KERS per lap to ensure they have equal or more KERS than attacking driver for following lap

Obviously, the extra element is that if teams want maximum amount of storage available, they would have to develop cars capable of taking it.

IE - If they couldn't build a car that would allow the full 200, they would be limited to a full maximum KERS of say 160...

The only downside is that say a driver got comfortably out in front, they could balance their KERS unit to enable them to strageically use KERS around a pit-stop to ensure they were either well out in front when they came out, or could use it to get tyres up to temp quickly...

Nice little description of the difference between KERS and Push to Pass.

That's just the difference in implementation. I'm asking for the actual on-track difference, what would make racing with push to pass different than what we have now?

Indycar use it, and they are rationed a certain amount to be used during the race. A driver could hoard it until the end, or use to to defend, or attack. When or where is up to the driver, not DRS where it's confined to a certain part of the track.

But KERS isn't limited to where the driver uses it on track and the defending driver could use it to defend...

The only difference between the systems is that push-to-pass is a bolt-on purely to gain extra power and it already has the extra power, whereas KERS has the regenerative energy element in that it gains it's energy from braking.

If F1 wanted to implement a p-t-p system, they could just change how KERS is used throughout a race by changing when and how it could be used.

Ok in my opinion Kers and drs are no good for f1 it's supposed to be a motorsport where supreme driving skill is displayed with minimal aids. I can't believe the go through this all the time we need to increase overtaking ,simple scrap all these cars and go back to cars of the 90s era minimal aids and nice wide chassis to incorporate maximum mechanical grip. There problem solved don't beleive me look at vids from hockenheim and monza in the 90s the slip streaming was unbelievable and the corner grip wasn't to bad either iam sure with today's technology we can have the awesome cars of yesteryear back with today's safety

I said it elsewhere a couple of days ago: get rid of the aero and engine restrictions: build some templates for different components, and mandate all cars must fit those. Allow whatever engines teams want, whatever KERS, movable aero as long as it is safe [keep today's safety standards, obviously] and let them play. Oh, and remove that bloody DRS. It was alright as a temporary fix, but it's been here too long now.

I said it elsewhere a couple of days ago: get rid of the aero and engine restrictions: build some templates for different components, and mandate all cars must fit those. Allow whatever engines teams want, whatever KERS, movable aero as long as it is safe [keep today's safety standards, obviously] and let them play. Oh, and remove that bloody DRS. It was alright as a temporary fix, but it's been here too long now.

You'd still need a money cap on top of that though - otherwise we'd have 3 awesome teams, then a bunch of cars that are several seconds off the pace.

Although I detest DRS and KERS, I just had an idea that perhaps might make at least the DRS a little more tolerable…

What about if there are 2 levels of DRS? One, a full open DRS for trailing drivers as it is today, and the second being a half open DRS for leading drivers to give them some sort of means to defend their position. It's not as good as being rid of it altogether, but it would help minimize the overly unfair advantage it offers trailing drivers. KERS is another issue altogether but all cars should have all the same systems so they all have an equal shot so long as they develop a car that's good enough to win.

Current tracks are for the most part fine with the exception of a few that are simply too narrow to allow drivers to try and make daring passes without suffering consequences.Funny though of all the people who hate processional racing as a result of such tracks rarely if ever complain about Monaco which is notoriously difficult to pass pretty much everywhere. And with the shoddy tires scrubbing off loads of marbles they can't even dare to go offline on the outside in the tunnel or they will be greeted by a whole mess of armco. LOL

What about if there are 2 levels of DRS? One, a full open DRS for trailing drivers as it is today, and the second being a half open DRS for leading drivers to give them some sort of means to defend their position. It's not as good as being rid of it altogether, but it would help minimize the overly unfair advantage it offers trailing drivers..

Couldn't you then just use one DRS level, the "half open" you're mentioning, to be used by the attacking driver only?In short, just reduce the DRS effectiveness.

_________________Proud member of the "It's Toro Rosso, not Torro Rosso" action committee.

without drs and kers each race would end pretty much in the same order as it started ....do we really want 20 repeats of procession like monaco borefests!overtaking is still very hard at a few tracks even with drs and kers.

I said it elsewhere a couple of days ago: get rid of the aero and engine restrictions: build some templates for different components, and mandate all cars must fit those. Allow whatever engines teams want, whatever KERS, movable aero as long as it is safe [keep today's safety standards, obviously] and let them play. Oh, and remove that bloody DRS. It was alright as a temporary fix, but it's been here too long now.

You'd still need a money cap on top of that though - otherwise we'd have 3 awesome teams, then a bunch of cars that are several seconds off the pace.

True... maybe allow customer cars back too, to reduce the deficit a bit. Budgets are impossible to police, I fear.

without drs and kers each race would end pretty much in the same order as it started ....do we really want 20 repeats of procession like monaco borefests!overtaking is still very hard at a few tracks even with drs and kers.

This is simply NOT true and passing in F1 has NEVER been easy and that is something that will and should never change.

I've been watching F1 religiously for a little over 30 years and while there have been races where the starting order into turn 1 is pretty much how the race unfolds, most of the time drivers make passes throughout the course of races. They might not be nearly as abundant as is afforded with assistive systems but they were there and the better the drivers attempting them, the more brilliant and exciting they tend to be. Webber passing Alonso through Eau Rough, a notoriously blindingly fast sweeping section on one of the fastest sections of the track without the help of DRS shows clearly that passes can be made without assistive devices/systems. So people claiming DRS is necessary to make passes and actually adds to the spectacle and excitement of F1 don't know what they are talking about.

I race Karts where Aero is virtually non existent and without the assistance of anything we pass one another just fine but it's by no means an easy task. I would rather come close to passing someone using only my talent and skill for an entire race, coming up just short than to press a button to give me an advantage to facilitate a pass I could not otherwise make. Speaking from experience, there is no better, more satisfying feeling than finally making a pass after trying for many, many laps. It's simply one of the best rushes you can ever experience and I am more than certain making a pass using DRS and KERS is much less satisfying for most F1 Drivers.

Passing is simply an art form in which some drivers are simply better than others and sadly it has increasingly declined over the last decade. Perhaps it has to do with Pay Drivers buying out better, more skilled drivers out of seats and therefore we don't have enough top tier talent to allow us to see more passes throughout races. I could be wrong but we will never know.

Mind you, ^^^that^^^ pass was made in cars that were supposedly too aero dependent to allow such moves without the front end washing out due to the turbulent wake from leading cars and at a time when it is "rumored" that Michael had the best everything and was virtually untouchable. Montoya must not have gotten that Memo on more than one occasion. LOL

Is it difficult to pass with current aero technology? YES, absolutely!!! BUT as I said, passing in F1 has ALWAYS been difficult and it well should be.

Is it impossible to make passes with current aero without the aide of artificial systems? NO.BUT the better the drivers will always be able to make passes compared to lesser drivers, artificial aides or not.